tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 14 10:36:12 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

RE: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)

DloraH ([email protected])

• From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
• Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:34:19 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• Thread-index: Acfel60qXMELEeO6Rum8o6AgVP2sIgAAXQQg

> > > There's probably only one person who can say which is the correct 
> > spelling;
> > > until that day, we need to accept both spellings, just 
> like jorneb and
> > > jornub. ;-D
> > >
> > > Quvar.
> > >
> >
> >Unless there's a good reason to choose one over the other.
> >In the case you give of {jornub/jorneb}, there is good 
> reason to choose
> >{jorneb} over {jornub}, namely that its components {jor} and 
> {neb} are both
> >relevant to the meaning of {jorneb}, whereas {nub} has no such 
> >meaning for {jornub}.
> >They're both canon, they're both acceptable, but {jorneb} is better.
> >
> >lay'tel SIvten   </HTML>
> 


mojaq / mojaQ


DloraH
 

• References:
  • Re: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
    • From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
• Next by Date: Re: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
• Previous by thread: Re: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
• Next by thread: Re: mu' chu' - 'el'I'jaH (?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level